[Mr Poo]

Originally Posted by niknik ↗

It says in the article. Stats came from the Financial Times.

That's the articles you should have posted..

[Mr Poo]

Originally Posted by niknik ↗

Article 38, PRC Trademark Law provides:
Any of the following acts shall be an infringement of the exclusive right to use a registered trade- mark:
(1) To use a trademark which is identical or similar to the registered trademark in respect of the same or similar goods without the authorisation of the proprietor of the registered trademark;
(2) To sell goods while knowing that a fake trademark is being passed off as a registered trademark.
(3) To forge or make, without authorisation, representations of the registered trademark of another person, or to sell forged representations or representations made without authorisation of the regis- tered trademark.
(4) To cause, in other respects, prejudice to the exclusive right to use the registered trademark of an- other person.
TRADEMARK LAW OF THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA (REVISED) (Zhonghua Renmin Gonghe Guo Shangbiao Fa (Xiuzhen), Di Sanshiba Tiao) (adopted at the 24' Session of the Standing Committee of the 5th National People's Congress on August 23, 1982, revised by the 30 ' Session of the Standing Committee of the 7 National People's Congress on Febru-
ary 22, 1993, and effective July 1, 1993) art. 38 (PRC) [hereinafter "PRC Trademark Law"]. The catch-all provision referring to causing prejudice to the exclusive trademark right of an- other person contained in Article 38(4) above is explained by Article 41 of the Trademark Law Implementing Regulations, which provides:
Any of the following acts will constitute an infringement of the exclusive right to use a registered trademark as referred to in item (4) of Article 38 of the Trademark Law:
(1) dealing in goods which were known or ought to have known to have infringed the exclusive right of another person to use a registered trademark;
(2) using, as a product name or label, written script or a design which is identical or similar to the registered trademark of another person who uses it on the same or similar commodities, with the similarity being sufficient to cause confusion;
(3) intentionally providing storage, transport, postage or harbouring offenders in order to facilitate the infringement of the exclusive right of another person to use a registered trademark.

Doesn't mean shit without enforcement..

The government doesn't know what goods each factory is producing, they still pay taxes on sales, paying employees and overhead. They don't have hidden factories that operate in secret..

[TheVrist]

Just to clarify, I said they don't honor patents. Not trademarks, they do however skirt around TMs by altering the name of the products.

They have TM laws, have always had them, they don't enforce them unless a company infringes on a company that is resided in china.

The 70% you.seen in the article are goods in transit. The raids, though not specified,.are most likely than not, people counterfeiting and already existing china product.

[Mr Poo]

^

[niknik]

Originally Posted by Mr Poo ↗

Doesn't mean shit without enforcement..

The government doesn't know what goods each factory is producing, they still pay taxes on sales, paying employees and overhead. They don't have hidden factories that operate in secret..

Nothing means shit to you. Every time it becomes obvious you're wrong you just throw out another hail Mary.


Just admit you do not understand. All your points thus far have been foolish.

[Mr Poo]

Originally Posted by niknik ↗

Nothing means shit to you. Every time it becomes obvious you're wrong you just throw out another hail Mary.


Just admit you do not understand. All your points thus far have been foolish.

Great counter-point

Originally Posted by TheVrist ↗

Just to clarify, I said they don't honor patents. Not trademarks, they do however skirt around TMs by altering the name of the products.

They have TM laws, have always had them, they don't enforce them unless a company infringes on a company that is resided in china.

The 70% you.seen in the article are goods in transit. The raids, though not specified,.are most likely than not, people counterfeiting and already existing china product.

[niknik]

Originally Posted by TheVrist ↗

Just to clarify, I said they don't honor patents. Not trademarks, they do however skirt around TMs by altering the name of the products.

They have TM laws, have always had them, they don't enforce them unless a company infringes on a company that is resided in china.

The 70% you.seen in the article are goods in transit. The raids, though not specified,.are most likely than not, people counterfeiting and already existing china product.

This entire discussion is about trademark infringement. Products that are the most popular in reproduction whether you do or don't enforce patents are also illegal in trademark law as well. Since it's not just the name on the tag that's usually trademarked, but the look as well.

[niknik]

Originally Posted by Mr Poo ↗

Great counter-point

So your basing you're opinion on whatever Vrist says. You could just let him say it and not even chime in.

[Mr Poo]

Originally Posted by niknik ↗

So your basing you're opinion on whatever Vrist says. You could just let him say it and not even chime in.

I'm not, he posted that reinforcing what I had literally just said..

[niknik]

Originally Posted by Mr Poo ↗

I'm not, he posted that reinforcing what I had literally just said..

I don't think he reinforced anything but your head.